Lian-Fang
Yu
,
Xiao-Ru
Li
*,
Shao-Yin
Liu
,
Guang-Wei
Xu
and
Yi-Zeng
Liang
Research Center of Modernization of Chinese Herbal Medicine, College of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Central South University, Changsha, 410083, P. R. China. E-mail: xrli@mail.csu.edu.cn
First published on 15th September 2009
Comparative analysis of essential components in the herbal pair Radix Saposhnikoviae–Rhizoma seu Radix Notopterygii and its single herbs is performed using two-dimensional gas chromatography-mass spectrometry data coupled with a chemometric method, named alternative moving window factor analysis. Identification of the compounds is also assisted by comparison of temperature-programmed retention indices (PTRIs) on the OV-1 column with authentic samples. The experimental results show that the main volatile chemical components in the herbal pair are mainly from Rhizoma seu Radix Notopterygii, and the number of essential chemical components in the herbal pair is almost equal to the sum of the number in the two single herbs but with a different quantity.
Generally speaking, the analysis of volatile oil is usually conducted with GC-MS, which contributes greatly to the characterization and identification of volatile chemical components in complex systems. However, the GC-MS data from volatile oil involves a great number of overlapped and even embedded peaks. These overlapped and embedded peaks may bring about many difficulties when carrying out quantitative and qualitative analysis correctly. On account of these overlapped and embedded peaks, the comparative analysis among different samples may be a hard task and is even sometimes impossible. Chemometric methods, a very useful assistant tool, use comprehensive chromatographic and spectral information to make it possible to resolve one complex system clearly and accurately. So far, the methods, such as subwindow factor analysis (SFA),4–6 evolving factor analysis (EFA),7,8 windows factor analysis (WFA),9–11 heuristic evolving latent projections (HELP),12–14 evolving window orthogonal projection (EWOP),15and multi-component spectra correlative chromatography (MSCC)16 have been developed to provide more information for chemical analysis. However, the methods mentioned above can neither resolve the embedded peaks nor simultaneously carry out resolution and comparative analysis between two complex systems. In order to solve this problem, a chemometric method, named alternative moving window factor analysis (AMWFA),17 was applied to analyze the samples in this study. This method could use the cross-information hidden in two systems to determine the number of common components in different samples and then to identify their corresponding spectra of common components automatically.
In this study, the volatile oils of RS, RSRN, and HP RS–RSRN were firstly separated and detected with GC-MS. Then, AMWFA was employed to do the comparative analysis of volatile oils among RS, RSRN and HP RS–RSRN and to resolve the overlapped or embedded peaks. The qualitative identification of these chemical components was carried out by mass spectra combined with PTRIs. The quantitative analysis was performed with the overall volume integration method. By comparison analysis, the differences and the likenesses of volatile components between the herbal pair and its single herbs can be found, and further knowledge about the mechanism of changes of the chemical components in the herbal pair can be obtained.
Suppose matrix X and Y are two comparative sections in two complicated fingerprints, respectively. AMWFA calculation procedure mainly consists of the following two steps:
(1) Common rank analysis: First, investigate the relationship of components between X and Y by MSCC and inverse projection multi-component spectral correlative chromatography (IP-MSCC). Second, determine the common components by AMWFA. The two matrices, say X and Y, are decomposed by singular value decomposition (SVD), and after that the two orthogonal bases of loadings, say E = {e1, e2,…,em} of X and F = {f1, f2,…,fn} of Y, can be obtained, where m and n are the number of components in X and Y, respectively. When one of the common components in both X and Y exists, its spectrum, say sk (k = 1, 2,…,c), can be written in the following equation:
![]() | (1) |
![]() | (2) |
Thus, the minimum of the above objective function can be achieved by solving the following eigenvalue problem, that is:
aTkETFbk = dk | (3) |
Notice that, ETE = I, FTF = I and sk = Eak = Fbk, then we have:
ak = ETsk = ETFbk = ETFFTsk = ETFFTEak | (4) |
bk = FTsk = FTEak = FTEETsk = FTEETFbk | (5) |
According to Eqs. (4) and (5), as long as the analyte, say sk, is really a common component of X and Y, ak and bk must be the eigenvectors of matrices ETFFTE and FTEETF with unit eigenvalues. If there are c common components in X and Y, there will be c eigenvalues, say dk (k = 1, 2,…,c), equal or close to 1. If there is no common component between X and Y, the value of dk will be significantly less than 1. In a word, the number with eigenvalue dk = 1 (k = 1, 2,…, c) is equal to the number of common components c.
(2) Resolving the pure spectra of common components: a. During the scanning procedure, one could easily get the number of common ranks between the two analyzed submatrices by common rank analysis. By collecting all these numbers acquired and then plotting them versus the retention times, the figure of common rank map with the information of common components can be obtained. b. When only one of the common components exists in both matrices compared, its spectrum, say s, can be easily extracted by using linear combination of their loading matrices E and F, that is, s = ∑aiei = ∑bjfj = Ea = Fb. During the scanning procedure through moving window to the target matrix X, one could easily get the spectrum corresponding to the biggest eigenvalue of the two analyzed submatrices by the proposed method. By collecting all these spectra acquired and then calculating the correlation coefficients between the front and spectra following it one by one and then plotting these correlation coefficients versus the retention times, the figure of spectral auto-correlative curve can be obtained. This plot records the change of the identified spectra along the scanned chromatographic regions. In this figure, the region with similarity close to 1 can determine a pure spectrum of target component together with the information from the common rank map.
The extraction of volatile oil of the single herbal medicine was carried out by the same method as mentioned above.
![]() | ||
Fig. 1 TIC curves of volatile oils of RS (a), RSRN (b) and HP RS–RSRN (c). |
![]() | ||
Fig. 2 The magnified TIC curve for peak cluster X within 13.331–13.998 min in RS and peak cluster Y within 13.498–14.162 min in the HP RS–RSRN. |
First, MSCC (X as base matrix, Y as target matrix) and inverse projection MSCC (IP-MSCC, Y as base matrix, X as target matrix) are used to see whether the two peak clusters contain common components. The results of MSCC and IP-MSCC are shown in Fig. 3, which indicates that the mass spectra features of the compounds in peak cluster X are highly correlated with that in peak cluster Y and then the two peak clusters contain common components. In order to further determine the number of common components in the two peak clusters, we conduct common rank analysis according to AMWFA. The obtainment of the common rank analysis shows that these two peak clusters have three components in common because of the first three values are close to zero (Fig. 4), and the values above the forth component become bigger and increase gradually. The resolution process of pure mass spectra for components followed to conduct after the number of common components in the two systems, i.e. peak cluster X and peak cluster Y, has been obtained.
![]() | ||
Fig. 3 Results of MSCC (a) and IP-MSCC (b) analysis. |
![]() | ||
Fig. 4 Results of common rank analysis. |
We take the whole X as the base matrix, and then the moving window searching was conducted on the whole Y with a fixed window size 3, then we can obtain the common rank map as shown in Fig. 5 (a). During the process of moving window scanning, the mass spectra and the similarity between the two close mass spectra were obtained by calculation with formula. The spectral auto-correlative curve was also acquired by plotting of similarity vs. retention time, as shown in Fig. 5 (b). According to AMWFA, on the region in which the number of common components is equal to one, the corresponding pure mass spectrum could be acquired from the eigenvector. In Fig. 5 (a), we can see clearly that there are three regions (13∼38, 88∼111, 132∼139), in which the number of common components is close to 1, in the common rank map, and three flat regions (indicated by R1, R2 and R3 in Fig. 5 (b)) with similarity being close to 1 appearing in the corresponding spectral auto-correlative curve. If the number of common components is equal to 1, a pure spectrum can be acquired from the corresponding region with correlation coefficient close to 1 in the spectral auto-correlative curve. In Fig. 5 (b), three flat parts indicated by R1, R2 and R3 show the regions, in which the three identified mass spectra were picked out. By a matching search from the NIST107 standard mass spectral database, the resolution result by AMWFA shows that the three common components in peak clusters X and Y are 2-pentyl-furan (R1), octanal (R2), and β-myrcene (R3) respectively, with the match similarity of 0.9947, 0.9483 and 0.9521. The pure chromatograms of peak clusters X and Y are shown in Fig. 6 which indicates that both peak clusters X and Y are overlapping ones of three components. Fig. 7, 8 and 9 show their resolved mass spectra.
![]() | ||
Fig. 5 Results of resolution of common components. (a) Common rank map from AMWFA; (b) spectral auto-correlative curves from AMWFA. |
![]() | ||
Fig. 6 Resolved chromatograms for peak cluster X and Y. |
![]() | ||
Fig. 7 Standard mass spectrum (a) and resolved mass spectrum (b) of 2-pentyl-furan. |
![]() | ||
Fig. 8 Standard mass spectrum (a) and resolved mass spectrum (b) of octanal. |
![]() | ||
Fig. 9 Standard mass spectrum (a) and resolved mass spectrum (b) of β-myrcene. |
Other peaks in the studied samples are determined qualitatively in the same way as described above. The tentative qualitative results of constituents of essential oils from RS, RSRN and the HP RS–RSRN are shown in Table 1.
No | Component/molecular formula | RS (rc) | RSRN (rc) | RS–RSRN (rc) | Average RI |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
a rc: relative content (%); RI: retention indices; —: not found. | |||||
1 | Heptanal/C7H14O | 1.17 | — | 0.41 | 865.394 |
2 | α-Pinene/C10H16 | 3.42 | 20.93 | 22 | 925.164 |
3 | Camphene/C10H16 | 0.32 | 3.28 | 3.38 | 931.962 |
4 | 1-Heptanol/C7H16O | 0.55 | — | — | 945.671 |
5 | (1S)-6,6-Dimethyl-2-methylene-bicyclo[3.1.1]heptane/C10H16 | 3.5 | 15.41 | 12.16 | 960.698 |
6 | 2-Pentyl-furan/C9H14O | 0.44 | 0.07 | 0.08 | 969.726 |
7 | Octanal/C8H16O | 4.98 | 0.27 | 1.89 | 974.162 |
8 | β-myrcene/C10H16 | 0.28 | 0.33 | 0.09 | 976.416 |
9 | α-phellandrene/C10H16 | 0.17 | 0.26 | 0.28 | 984.466 |
10 | 3-Carene/C10H16 | 0.61 | 1.08 | 2.9 | 993.900 |
11 | (+)-4-Carene/C10H16 | 0.34 | 0.18 | 0.54 | 998.366 |
12 | 1-Methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-benzene/C10H14 | 1.65 | 3.11 | 1.47 | 1002.438 |
13 | D-Limonene/C10H16 | 5.53 | 9.57 | 7.71 | 1014.584 |
14 | Pinene/C10H16 | 0.73 | 0.51 | 1.52 | 1021.222 |
15 | (Z)-3,7-Dimethyl-1,3,6-octatriene/C10H16 | 0.15 | 0.23 | 0.15 | 1030.099 |
16 | 1-Methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-1,4-cyclohexadiene/C10H16 | 1.79 | 4.83 | 1.73 | 1039.936 |
17 | trans-α,α,5-Trimethyl-5-ethenyltetrahydro-2-furanmethanol/C10H18O2 | 0.56 | 0.04 | 0.06 | 1047.253 |
18 | 2-Nonanone/C9H18O | 0.6 | 0.13 | 0.16 | 1063.125 |
19 | (+)-2-Carene/C10H16 | 0.65 | 0.89 | 0.87 | 1067.167 |
20 | Nonanal/C9H18O | 0.31 | — | 0.25 | 1073.609 |
21 | 1,3,3-Trimethyl-bicyclo[2.2.1]heptan-2-ol/C10H18O | — | 1.46 | 1.6 | 1087.973 |
22 | 2-Nonenal/C9H16O | 0.86 | — | — | 1123.784 |
23 | Borneol/C10H18O | 0.14 | 1.55 | 1.79 | 1133.615 |
24 | 4-Methyl-1-(1-methylethyl)-3-cyclohexen-1-ol/C10H18O | 0.99 | 5.74 | 5.98 | 1151.774 |
25 | 1-Nonen-3-ol/C9H18O | 1.67 | — | — | 1158.126 |
26 | α,α,4-Trimethyl-3-cyclohexene-1-methanol/C10H18O | — | 8.05 | 8.18 | 1170.166 |
27 | Benzylidenemalonaldehyde/C10H8O2 | 14.85 | 0.77 | 1.75 | 1219.493 |
28 | (E)-2-Tridecenal/C13H24O | 0.97 | 0.56 | — | 1228.645 |
29 | Octanoic acid/C8H16O2 | 1.34 | — | — | 1235.776 |
30 | Bornyl acetate/C12H20O2 | 0.29 | 2.35 | 2.36 | 1257.154 |
31 | (E,E)-2,4-Decadienal/C10H16O | 1.52 | — | 0.35 | 1279.142 |
32 | Eudesma-4(14),11-diene/C15H24 | — | 0.41 | — | 1453.956 |
33 | 1-(1,5-Dimethyl-4-hexenyl)-4-methyl-benzene/C15H22 | 0.14 | 0.02 | 0.06 | 1466.829 |
34 | (S)-1-Methyl-4-(5-methyl-1-methylene-4-hexenyl)-cyclohexene/C15H24 | 4.86 | — | 0.35 | 1485.251 |
35 | cis-Undec-4-enal/C11H20O | 1.29 | — | — | 1492.261 |
36 | (1S-cis)-1,2,3,5,6,8a-Hexahydro-4,7-dimethyl-1-(1-methylethyl)-naphthalene/C15H24 | 0.25 | 0.17 | 0.03 | 1516.440 |
37 | Cyclohexanemethanol/C15H26O | — | 0.42 | 0.07 | 1519.239 |
38 | 3-Isopropyl-6,7-dimethyltricyclo[4.4.0.0(2,8)]decane-9,10-diol/C15H26O2 | 1.53 | — | — | 1530.752 |
39 | Spathulenol/C15H24O | — | 0.82 | 0.95 | 1552.303 |
40 | 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8-Octahydro-α,α,3,8-tetramethyl-5-azulenemethanol/C15H26O | — | 0.5 | 0.54 | 1575.761 |
41 | cis-Lanceol/C15H24O | 0.99 | — | — | 1582.697 |
42 | Dehydroxy-isocalamendiol/C15H24O | 0.1 | 0.19 | 0.11 | 1592.936 |
43 | γ-Eudesmol/C15H26O | — | 0.52 | 0.76 | 1597.899 |
44 | Heneicosane/C21H44 | 0.99 | 0.02 | — | 1792.396 |
45 | 1-Heptadecanol acetate/C19H38O2 | 0.14 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 1850.557 |
46 | Falcarinol (Z)-(−)-1,9-heptadecadiene-4,6-diyne-3-ol/C17H24O | 10.78 | — | 1.78 | 1996.983 |
Comparison of the essential oil compositions showed that there are 44 common essential chemical components between the HP RS–RSRN and single herb RS, 53 common essential chemical components between the HP RS–RSRN and single herb RSRN, and 33 common essential chemical components among the three system, i.e. the HP RS–RSRN and two single herbs RS and RSRN. In terms of the number and the relative content of the chemical components, the volatile chemical components in HP RS-RSRN are mainly from single herb RSRN, and the number of volatile chemical components in HP RS–RSRN is almost equal to the sum of the number of the two single herbs but with a different quantity.
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2009 |